3 ms·
It sounds like there's at least a simple workaround: Include a noreply email address in the To field (or your own address, I suppose). That will capture reply a
by kevingadd 6y ago
It sounds like there's at least a simple workaround: Include a noreply email address in the To field (or your own address, I suppose). That will capture reply and reply all and should prevent sending a domain for BCC.
I wonder if this undesirable behavior is according to some spec?
- oneeyedpigeon 6y agoIsn't this mandatory anyway? Is To: optional?
- Tepix 6y agoYes
- mkl 6y ago"To" is optional. When I email groups of students (sometimes hundreds at once), I pile all the addresses into the BCC field, and usually nothing else.
- ajross 6y agoYou got two answers that skipped the reason: "To:" is a RFC822 header field. It's data in the message. Transport of a message to its destination is handled by a different layer (SMTP) which has its own addressing scheme that is stored outside of the the message[1]. It's entirely possible to omit the To: header, or include a value that doesn't match the actual recipient. [1] And the reason for that is that message recipients in the era of UUCP had to store the "route" to the destination in-band and often needed to be munged per-site to be useful.